Stephen MacKershan

  Although I never worked on The Hobbit I do work within the visual effects industry. I have to take exception to your comments above. I work with many highly skilled animators who all try to convey emotion in every scene they work on. Although not all of them may be fully versed in cinema language a great many of them are. It is an essential part of being a good animator. Ultimately the creative decisions made on how a CG shot should feel in terms of camera framing and movement, pacing, look and emotion come down to the director. Every CG shot has to go through an approval process before it is deemed fit to be in the film and the final decision ultimately lies with the director. If he or she's not happy it either doesn't make the cut or has to be re-worked until it does work. I agree that many blockbuster films are too CG heavy and lack the subtlety that may be conveyed in live-action. I feel that this problem is not due to uninspired or uneducated CG artists but more to uninspiring films and direction. Too often films are made to outdo each other in terms of the scale of CG used. I believe this is driven by studios trying to get more people through the cinema door and is guided by directors who are often so beholden to the studios that they have no real creative control over a film. I'd think that Peter Jackson has more control over his films (though the fact they've stretched The Hobbit out to 3 films make me question this somewhat) and that if the CG isn't working it's his fault, not the artists creating it. We, as visual effects artists, are often so far down the line of creative authority that we have no say in how a shot is to be constructed. CG doesn't have to be big, loud and showy. In my opinion the best work is that which you don't even notice, and it does exist more than you probably realise. So please, realise that when you say dismissive things like we're just a team of designers with a mouse and not artists that some of us may find it offensive.